RE: IMSC 1.0.1 WD for WR

> ...
> there is possible harm in failing to give notice of such a change and then implement the change, which may cause some surprise.

What harm are you envisaging exactly, caused by this surprise?



From: Glenn Adams [glenn@skynav.com]
Sent: 15 March 2017 20:11
To: Nigel Megitt
Cc: Pierre-Anthony Lemieux; public-tt@w3.org
Subject: Re: IMSC 1.0.1 WD for WR



On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 2:05 PM, Nigel Megitt <nigel.megitt@bbc.co.uk<mailto:nigel.megitt@bbc.co.uk>> wrote:
It seems relatively pain free to remove the word "minor"; I would also support adding a reference to a change history or diff relative to IMSC1 to clarify exactly what the differences are.

We agreed to take the version numbering issue up again at CR; given that deferral, I do not believe we need to forewarn the world of a potential change we may make in the future to the name/version number. Rather, if we do end up making a change to the version number in a future transition stage of the document then we should back-reference to the previously used name and version number instead so the history is clear.

It is important, IMO, to communicate potentially important changes that may occur in the SoTD. It reduces the surprise factor. There is no harm in saying the version may change and have it not change at CR; while there is possible harm in failing to give notice of such a change and then implement the change, which may cause some surprise.


We already agreed to communicate the potential change to the name and number in the liaison text that will be sent to initiate the wide review and I do not believe we need to do any more at this stage.

Nigel

________________________________
From: Glenn Adams [glenn@skynav.com<mailto:glenn@skynav.com>]
Sent: 15 March 2017 00:57
To: Pierre-Anthony Lemieux
Cc: public-tt@w3.org<mailto:public-tt@w3.org>
Subject: Re: IMSC 1.0.1 WD for WR

Please add text to the SoTD that the version and/or title may be changed prior to CR. In addition, please remove the word "minor" from "minor revision" in the SoTD, as that calls for a judgment about which we do not have consensus.

On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 6:43 PM, Pierre-Anthony Lemieux <pal@sandflow.com<mailto:pal@sandflow.com>> wrote:
Good morning/evening,

Please find at [1] at candidate IMSC 1.0.1 WD for wide review.

[1] https://rawgit.com/w3c/imsc/WR-imsc-1.0.1/imsc1/spec/ttml-ww-profiles.html

I have set the publication date to 21 March 2017 tentatively.

Best,

-- Pierre